The civic record
Read. Follow. Verify.Utah Prohibits Record Subjects from Participating in Public Records Request Reviews and Appeals
Last action · March 6, 2026: House/ filedSponsor: Lisa Shepherd
Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.
What This Bill Proposed
This bill prohibits individuals who are the subject of a government records request from participating in the entity's review, , response, or appeal related to that request, effective May 6, 2026.
Changes how government agencies handle public records requests by requiring individuals named in records to recuse themselves from processing or deciding appeals on those requests, shifting review authority entirely to uninvolved personnel.
Who It Would Have Affected
Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.
Governmental entities
Government agencies must ensure that record subjects do not participate in reviewing, classifying, or handling appeals for records requests naming them.
Record requesters
Requesters experience modified administrative handling where individuals named in records are excluded from deciding access or classification.
Individuals who are the subject of record requests
Subject individuals lose the ability to participate in or make final decisions regarding the classification, review, or appeal of records requests concerning them.
Key Facts
You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is barred from participating in a records request review under this bill?
What happens if the chief administrative officer handling an appeal is the subject of the underlying records request?
What else do you want to know?
News Coverage
Follow the record
Votes, people, money & the original sourceWhere This Stands
This bill did not become law - Died at adjournment · introduced in the House.
Procedural history
9 actions- Mar 6, 2026HouseHouse/ filed
- Mar 6, 2026HouseHouse/ strike enacting clause
- Feb 17, 2026Version SponsorLFA/ fiscal note sent to sponsor for HB0551
- Feb 12, 2026HouseIntroducedHouse/ 1st reading (Introduced)
- Feb 12, 2026HouseHouse/ received bill from Legislative Research
- Feb 12, 2026Legislative Fiscal AgencyLFA/ bill sent to agencies for fiscal input for HB0551
Show 3 earlier actions
- Feb 12, 2026Legislative Fiscal AnalystLFA/ bill assigned to staff for fiscal analysis for HB0551
- Feb 12, 2026Legislative Research and General CounselNumbered Bill Publicly Distributed
- Feb 12, 2026Legislative Research and General CounselBill Numbered but not Distributed
Version history
Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.
View official text →Lobbying Activity
No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.
Full breakdown
Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.
Sponsors
Discoveries
Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.
Conflict of Interest Restriction in Records Processing
The bill systematically removes record subjects from the administrative decision-making chain regarding requests that name them, addressing potential conflicts of interest in public records access.
Connected Entities
Sources
le.utah.gov
Analysis Score
0–100- Significance20Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 60)
- Controversy25Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
- Entertainment5Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
- Buzz20Current news / social attention level
Publisher tools